Tweet
ACTIVE SETTLEMENT OF NAGORNO-KARABAKH'S LIBERATED TERRITORIES BY REFUGEES FROM AZERBAIJAN WOULD STRENGTHEN ARMENIAN PARTIES' ARGUMENTS AT THE PEACE TALKS
David Stepanyan
ArmInfo
2010-09-29 18:24:00
Interview with Chairman of the Public Council on Foreign Policy and
Security of Nagorno-Karabakh Republic Masis Mailyan
Oct 4-5 the Armenian Parliament is to discuss whether to recognize
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic or not. Is this good for the Armenian
side's interests?
I think this is a positive step and within the interests of the
Armenian party in the Karabakh peace process at least because the
initiators of the discussion hereby support urgency of the given issue.
Armenia must demonstrate to the world that independence of the NKR as
execution of the Nagorno-Karabakh people's right to self-determination
cannot be a subject of negotiations especially with participation of
Azerbaijan. I think that the potential of Armenians must be used fully
to achieve international recognition of the NKR. Over the last years,
it was necessary to create relevant conditions for other countries to
follow Armenia's example when it recognized the NKR. It is necessary
to finally start this work and make up for the lost time.
The liberated but not populated territories of Nagorno-Karabakh remain
a separate subject of the peace talks. Wouldn't their settlement help
to solve this problem - the way Israel is doing on the West Bank -
and is this possible at all?
In general, the settlement policy held up to this day has demonstrated
its low efficiency. When the matter concerns settlement, officials
speak about our administerial territories of Kashatag and Karvachar
bordering with Armenia. At the same time, it is more than obvious that
from the viewpoint of strategic settlement, the eastern territories
fixed in the Nagorno-Karabakh Constitution are of great significance,
particularly, the territories from Martakert at the north up to the
river Arax at the south.
Though much money is needed to implement this project, one could at
least create the relevant infrastructure and lay communications by the
routes, along which new populated areas may be built. For example,
the gas pipeline leading to Martakert should have been laid in the
area of former Aghdam region. There is a number of other useful ideas
about territories and borders that have not been implemented yet.
Active settlement of the NKR territories first of all by the refugees
from Azerbaijan would strengthen the Armenian parties' arguments at
the talks.
A group of international experts are to visit the liberated territories
in the next few days. Isn't this a kind of concession on the part
of the OSCE MG co-chairs in response to Azerbaijan's refusal to push
its resolution at the UN General Assembly?
Having a similar status with Azerbaijan within international
structures, Armenia should be able to block Azerbaijan's initiatives
on Karabakh. One should make everybody realize that Azerbaijan lost
all rights to Artsakh long ago, and all its actions in this direction
will be suppressed. The purposeful work on international recognition
of the NKR is capable to neutralize Azerbaijan's provocations in
international organizations.
The Armenian lobby has done its best to prevent the appointment of
Matthew Bryza as US Ambassador to Azerbaijan. What is the danger of
Bryza's presence in Baku for Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia?
Appointment of Matthew Bryza as US ambassador to Azerbaijan does not
seriously endangers Armenian interests.
Like any other diplomat, Matthew Bryza is first of all the conductor
of his country's policy. Consequently, I don't think his appointment
may seriously threaten the Armenian interests. Moreover, when this
man was directly tackling the problem of Nagorno-Karabakh as the US
Co-chairman of the OSCE Minsk Group, there was absolutely no such
active criticism against him. I do not understand why the criticism
has appeared now all of a sudden.
Having certain influence in the US Congress, the Armenian lobbyists
could have encouraged Bryza to solve the priority national problems
on recognition of Artsakh and the Armenian Genocide in Ottoman Turkey.
Will the agreement prolonging the stay of Russian troops in Armenia
enhance the security of Nagorno-Karabakh Republic?
The Russian military infrastructure in Armenia has directly nothing
to do with the NKR security.
Theoretically, one can suppose of course that in case of resumption
of Azerbaijan's aggression, Russia will implement its obligations of
ensuring Armenia's security. In this case the Armenian armed forces
would be able to deploy more forces and equipment in the eastern,
Karabakh direction. At the same time, he thinks that if Azerbaijan
receives the Russian S-300 air defense system, this will reduce
the vulnerability of Azeri strategic objects. Thereby the balance
of forces in the region will be broken, as at present the lack of
reliable air defense is one of the elements preventing Azerbaijan
from a military adventure
Why is the number of soldiers killed in clashes inside the
Nagorno-Karabakh army growing?
Such incidents have always been present but have not been made public.
Today, our people are better informed and demand that such things no
longer happen. The main thing here is not to go too far in criticism:
we must criticize bad officers but we must not stop respecting
our army.
From: A. Papazian
David Stepanyan
ArmInfo
2010-09-29 18:24:00
Interview with Chairman of the Public Council on Foreign Policy and
Security of Nagorno-Karabakh Republic Masis Mailyan
Oct 4-5 the Armenian Parliament is to discuss whether to recognize
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic or not. Is this good for the Armenian
side's interests?
I think this is a positive step and within the interests of the
Armenian party in the Karabakh peace process at least because the
initiators of the discussion hereby support urgency of the given issue.
Armenia must demonstrate to the world that independence of the NKR as
execution of the Nagorno-Karabakh people's right to self-determination
cannot be a subject of negotiations especially with participation of
Azerbaijan. I think that the potential of Armenians must be used fully
to achieve international recognition of the NKR. Over the last years,
it was necessary to create relevant conditions for other countries to
follow Armenia's example when it recognized the NKR. It is necessary
to finally start this work and make up for the lost time.
The liberated but not populated territories of Nagorno-Karabakh remain
a separate subject of the peace talks. Wouldn't their settlement help
to solve this problem - the way Israel is doing on the West Bank -
and is this possible at all?
In general, the settlement policy held up to this day has demonstrated
its low efficiency. When the matter concerns settlement, officials
speak about our administerial territories of Kashatag and Karvachar
bordering with Armenia. At the same time, it is more than obvious that
from the viewpoint of strategic settlement, the eastern territories
fixed in the Nagorno-Karabakh Constitution are of great significance,
particularly, the territories from Martakert at the north up to the
river Arax at the south.
Though much money is needed to implement this project, one could at
least create the relevant infrastructure and lay communications by the
routes, along which new populated areas may be built. For example,
the gas pipeline leading to Martakert should have been laid in the
area of former Aghdam region. There is a number of other useful ideas
about territories and borders that have not been implemented yet.
Active settlement of the NKR territories first of all by the refugees
from Azerbaijan would strengthen the Armenian parties' arguments at
the talks.
A group of international experts are to visit the liberated territories
in the next few days. Isn't this a kind of concession on the part
of the OSCE MG co-chairs in response to Azerbaijan's refusal to push
its resolution at the UN General Assembly?
Having a similar status with Azerbaijan within international
structures, Armenia should be able to block Azerbaijan's initiatives
on Karabakh. One should make everybody realize that Azerbaijan lost
all rights to Artsakh long ago, and all its actions in this direction
will be suppressed. The purposeful work on international recognition
of the NKR is capable to neutralize Azerbaijan's provocations in
international organizations.
The Armenian lobby has done its best to prevent the appointment of
Matthew Bryza as US Ambassador to Azerbaijan. What is the danger of
Bryza's presence in Baku for Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia?
Appointment of Matthew Bryza as US ambassador to Azerbaijan does not
seriously endangers Armenian interests.
Like any other diplomat, Matthew Bryza is first of all the conductor
of his country's policy. Consequently, I don't think his appointment
may seriously threaten the Armenian interests. Moreover, when this
man was directly tackling the problem of Nagorno-Karabakh as the US
Co-chairman of the OSCE Minsk Group, there was absolutely no such
active criticism against him. I do not understand why the criticism
has appeared now all of a sudden.
Having certain influence in the US Congress, the Armenian lobbyists
could have encouraged Bryza to solve the priority national problems
on recognition of Artsakh and the Armenian Genocide in Ottoman Turkey.
Will the agreement prolonging the stay of Russian troops in Armenia
enhance the security of Nagorno-Karabakh Republic?
The Russian military infrastructure in Armenia has directly nothing
to do with the NKR security.
Theoretically, one can suppose of course that in case of resumption
of Azerbaijan's aggression, Russia will implement its obligations of
ensuring Armenia's security. In this case the Armenian armed forces
would be able to deploy more forces and equipment in the eastern,
Karabakh direction. At the same time, he thinks that if Azerbaijan
receives the Russian S-300 air defense system, this will reduce
the vulnerability of Azeri strategic objects. Thereby the balance
of forces in the region will be broken, as at present the lack of
reliable air defense is one of the elements preventing Azerbaijan
from a military adventure
Why is the number of soldiers killed in clashes inside the
Nagorno-Karabakh army growing?
Such incidents have always been present but have not been made public.
Today, our people are better informed and demand that such things no
longer happen. The main thing here is not to go too far in criticism:
we must criticize bad officers but we must not stop respecting
our army.
From: A. Papazian